…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
Shocked to hear that Trump’s judge threw out a case against Trump.
Just as I was shocked to hear Trump’s SCOTUS protected Trump from criminal prosecution.
Totally shocking.
…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
Assuming her opinion tracks Thomas’s opinion, they won’t toss her off the case. They won’t say it was inherently unreasonable to agree with a SCOTUS justice.
…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
this was not going to trial before the election anyways . . . but now it appears there’s no way to bring a case against a POTUS. The billionaire class has us setup for a series of kings in Oval office, I hope you’all got your indentured servitude shoes ready to go.
…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
this was not going to trial before the election anyways . . . but now it appears there’s no way to bring a case against a POTUS. The billionaire class has us setup for a series of kings in Oval office, I hope you’all got your indentured servitude shoes ready to go.
If you accept her position, then you can’t use the Special Counsel like this. And, instead, prosecutions would need to be brought by regular DOJ personnel. That’s way worse in terms of political bias, but it’s the implication of Cannon’s position.
…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
this was not going to trial before the election anyways . . . but now it appears there’s no way to bring a case against a POTUS. The billionaire class has us setup for a series of kings in Oval office, I hope you’all got your indentured servitude shoes ready to go.
If you accept her position, then you can’t use the Special Counsel like this. And, instead, prosecutions would need to be brought by regular DOJ personnel. That’s way worse in terms of political bias, but it’s the implication of Cannon’s position.
What a fucking joke.
Another issue — to which I don’t know the answer (yet) — is whether DOJ could replace Smith and just continue the prosecution with regular DOJ personnel. Or, would Cannon say that you can’t re-indict Trump because that would be double jeopardy? If the original indictment by Smith was invalid, then jeopardy arguably never attached, so DOJ should be free to start over.
Please assure me there’s some procedural reason this came down on the first day of the RNC, and it isn’t as coordinated as it seems.
I once said when Trump was in office that short of impeachment he could do almost anything and somebody said I was wrong.
I think presidential power is too big.
I once said when Trump was in office that short of impeachment he could do almost anything and somebody said I was wrong.
I think presidential power is too big.
Well it seems that SCOTUS has told him that in his second term he will be able to do whatever he wants. As long as it’s framed as an official act.
Best of luck to my American friends who are now staring at a much, much worse Trump second term and possibly beyond.
…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
this was not going to trial before the election anyways . . . but now it appears there’s no way to bring a case against a POTUS. The billionaire class has us setup for a series of kings in Oval office, I hope you’all got your indentured servitude shoes ready to go.
If you accept her position, then you can’t use the Special Counsel like this. And, instead, prosecutions would need to be brought by regular DOJ personnel. That’s way worse in terms of political bias, but it’s the implication of Cannon’s position.
if this opinion stands, what would be the process of a special Counsel in the future - if they cant prosecute cases against the president.
Biden, after urging respect for justice system, claims SCOTUS immunity ruling is ‘attack’ on ‘rule of law’ | Fox News
“It’s reckless, it’s dangerous, it’s irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged just because they don’t like the verdict,” Biden said in response to Trump’s remarks about the NY v. Trump verdict, which found the former president guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records related to the hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in the lead up to the 2016 presidential election.
“Our justice system has endured for nearly 250 years, and it literally is the cornerstone of America. Our justice system, that justice should be respected. And we should never allow anyone to tear it down. It’s as simple as that,” Biden added at the time.
Enlightening how he has exposed the failures of our entire system of government. It ultimately depends on people doing the right thing. Institutions only stand and function with good actors at the helm.
Impeachment is the canary in the coal mine. If you have enough political power, in our system, you are untouchable.
There’s no more ambiguity on this point no matter how much you want to convince yourself otherwise.
Does this mean no more Special Council prosecutions ever, or just in cases similar to this? Does this invalidate the Hunter Biden conviction?
…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
this was not going to trial before the election anyways . . . but now it appears there’s no way to bring a case against a POTUS. The billionaire class has us setup for a series of kings in Oval office, I hope you’all got your indentured servitude shoes ready to go.
If you accept her position, then you can’t use the Special Counsel like this. And, instead, prosecutions would need to be brought by regular DOJ personnel. That’s way worse in terms of political bias, but it’s the implication of Cannon’s position.
So Trump gets elected, shit-cans all the “regular DOJ personnel,” staffs DOJ with his loyal lackeys, who are then tasked to go after every political rival.
What could go wrong?
Assuming her opinion tracks Thomas’s opinion, they won’t toss her off the case. They won’t say it was inherently unreasonable to agree with a SCOTUS justice. //
Its funny to me that you all are arguing over the merits of this dismissal, why or how it is possible, etc… Cannot everyone see it is plain as day, I introduce you to our next Supreme Court justice, Judge Cannon…This has been her job interview, and she has passed it with flying colors. She has read the tea leaves, and sees that Trump likely will be our next(and probably last) president. He likely will get to replace two more justices in the next term, and she will be top of the list…
And with an R senate in place, there will be no stopping her appointment. Talk about fast tracking to the Supreme Court, this will he historic…
I once said when Trump was in office that short of impeachment he could do almost anything and somebody said I was wrong.
I think presidential power is too big.
And this decision could make that even worse. A special counsel is supposed to be somewhat independent. If the law now requires that DOJ use its regular personnel when prosecuting a candidate (like Trump) that gives even more power to the Attorney General, who is part of the President’s team.
Does this mean no more Special Council prosecutions ever, or just in cases similar to this? Does this invalidate the Hunter Biden conviction?
I have only read the first and last several pages of her 93-page decision. From that, it appears she held that the Special Counsel must have been confirmed by the Senate, the same way a US Attorney is confirmed. David Weiss, who was investigating Hunter, was once a US Attorney. So, he had Senate confirmation. But, his confirmation was solely in that original role; he was never confirmed in the role of Special Counsel. Thus, Hunter has an argument that Cannon’s reasoning applies to him, too, but that argument faces the additional hurdle that Weiss had once been confirmed.
…and apparently says that the Special Counsel’s office is unconstitutional.
I’m sure this will be appealed.
If this is reversed, will it be the end of her on this case? Of course, if he wins in November it will all be moot.
this was not going to trial before the election anyways . . . but now it appears there’s no way to bring a case against a POTUS. The billionaire class has us setup for a series of kings in Oval office, I hope you’all got your indentured servitude shoes ready to go.
If you accept her position, then you can’t use the Special Counsel like this. And, instead, prosecutions would need to be brought by regular DOJ personnel. That’s way worse in terms of political bias, but it’s the implication of Cannon’s position.
if this opinion stands, what would be the process of a special Counsel in the future - if they cant prosecute cases against the president.
Per Cannon: they would need confirmation by the Senate and apparently the Congress would need to appropriate the SC’s budget. So, the President would nominate an SC, and the Senate would (or not) confirm them along with some appropriation for that office. Or, just have the prosecution brought by existing DOJ personnel.
I once said when Trump was in office that short of impeachment he could do almost anything and somebody said I was wrong.
I think presidential power is too big.
Well it seems that SCOTUS has told him that in his second term he will be able to do whatever he wants. As long as it’s framed as an official act.
Best of luck to my American friends who are now staring at a much, much worse Trump second term and possibly beyond.
We (USA) are all being had here - the Left think they can slow down or even stop this move towards authoritarianism\fascism - and the Right think they’re going to get back to an America of opportunities and greatness. Get used to having less and less and still being in debt up to your ass.